Museums and Microbial Curation: About Time!

By way of Jonathan Eisen, we discover that museums are starting to hire microbiology curators. I'm very excited about this, probably more excited than Eisen (and he's a pretty excitable guy). In part, I've always loved museums and have thought that building microbiological collections for museums would be a neat thing to do. But there are also some vital scientific needs that would be met by museum curation.

What makes microbiological curation really exciting to me is the advent of cheap genomic methods. If you're able to culture it, we can sequence its genome, which is a pretty good way to characterize things. And over the last couple of decades, museums have moved into phylogenetics in a big way, so let's bring on the phylogenomics.

Related to phylogenomics, we now can also characterize which genes are expressed ('turned on') and how much under various conditions by RNA sequencing. This would also be a great dataset to build for a wide range of organisms. Another cool technology is single-cell sequencing, where if you can isolate a single cell, you can often sequence much of its genome, even if you can't grow it.

Finally, as sequencing costs continue to decrease, more and more microbiology projects will sequence microbial DNA straight from samples (e.g., a clump of soil or, erm, poop). To make sense of these data, we really need more microbial genomes to identify these short sequences we generate. And one organisms from each species won't do--in bacteria, two bacteria from the same species will often only share 70% of their genes (or less). We'll need lots.

The other thing about microbial curation is that we're actually dealing with 'living specimens.' If we can culture it (even if it's hard to do), then we can cryogenically store it, and then later thaw out the 'microbcicle' and grow it. Can't do that with a T. rex (probably a good thing...).

Besides, I want to go to museums and see exhibits that focus on microbes....

More like this

I don't see the need to redescribe the recent paper about the discovery of bacteria that can might replace, in extremis, phosphorus with arsenic, which was overhyped by NASA, was poorly covered by most journalists, and which has compromising methodological problems (for good coverage, read here,…
Since I'm on-route to a Human Microbiome Project meeting (uncharacteristically, it's being held in a climate-friendly location--Houston; last year, it was held in Boston. In January.), reviewing this paper about the GEBA project, the Genomic Encyclopedia of Bacteria and Archaea, seemed appropriate…
Shotgun sequencing refers to the process whereby a genome is sequenced and assembled with no prior information regarding the genomic location of any of the DNA we sequence. There are quite a few steps that you have to go through before you have an assembled genome sequence. We're going to cover…
Nature Genetics is asking: What would you do if it became possible to sequence the equivalent of a full human genome for only $1,000? George Church would repeat the Applera dataset for everyone on earth, sequencing every exon from every human being. Francis Collins would sequence people with…

Have you checked out the Field Museum's Underground Adventure? It's not real microbes, but it does contain quite a lot of microbial information.

Since museums are supposed to be repositories of our culture(s), I think it's perfectly appropriate that we extend our tolerance for microbial and fungal cultures as well.

By heteromeles (not verified) on 27 Jan 2011 #permalink